5 ms·

The computational photography for those is done on a computer.

astrange 4y ago
Where it has more power, but lacks info like how the OIS was moving as the pictures were taken, so isn’t necessarily as good. And none of those products have nearly the sales of a smartphone to sustain R&D. Similar to how the headphone dongle of an iPhone is much cheaper and yet better quality than most audiophile equipment.
- cthalupa 4y ago
  I would consider myself barely passable in skills compared to the average hobbyist photographer and have never seen in-phone computational work that I would take over what can be done manually in Lightroom, or if you want to go the automatic route, with Skylum's offerings.
  - astrange 4y ago
    The difficulty would be recreating Night Mode by yourself using phone raws as opposed to Sony a7s raws. Or handheld HDR stacking but they're more able to deal with that.
  - criddell 4y ago
    Even if you aren't interested in the computational work that supposedly enhances a photo, there are other things camera phones have given us that DSLR companies could do but don't. For example, I really like live or motion photos.
criddell 4y ago
A phone can do on-camera stuff or capture RAW and let you mess with it on your computer. Are there any big sensor cameras that give you those same options? I’m not aware of any and it baffles me that the camera companies feel so little need to innovate. I kind of wish Apple would do a dedicated big-sensor camera. Also, are you saying you could reproduce any of the on-phone stuff easily on your computer? I’m thinking about the astrophotography modes, portrait modes, live photos, and low light features.
- emkoemko 4y ago
  innovate what? what pro needs in camera processing? when you can process on a computer that is way more powerful and better UX for processing a large number of images?
  - criddell 4y ago
    The consumer market is a pretty big part of most DSLR sales. There really aren’t all that many professional photographers, relatively speaking.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

Where it has more power, but lacks info like how the OIS was moving as the pictures were taken, so isn’t necessarily as good. And none of those products have nearly the sales of a smartphone to sustain R&D. Similar to how the headphone dongle of an iPhone is much cheaper and yet better quality than most audiophile equipment.

cthalupa 4y ago
I would consider myself barely passable in skills compared to the average hobbyist photographer and have never seen in-phone computational work that I would take over what can be done manually in Lightroom, or if you want to go the automatic route, with Skylum's offerings.
- astrange 4y ago
  The difficulty would be recreating Night Mode by yourself using phone raws as opposed to Sony a7s raws. Or handheld HDR stacking but they're more able to deal with that.
- criddell 4y ago
  Even if you aren't interested in the computational work that supposedly enhances a photo, there are other things camera phones have given us that DSLR companies could do but don't. For example, I really like live or motion photos.

criddell 4y ago

A phone can do on-camera stuff or capture RAW and let you mess with it on your computer. Are there any big sensor cameras that give you those same options? I’m not aware of any and it baffles me that the camera companies feel so little need to innovate. I kind of wish Apple would do a dedicated big-sensor camera. Also, are you saying you could reproduce any of the on-phone stuff easily on your computer? I’m thinking about the astrophotography modes, portrait modes, live photos, and low light features.

emkoemko 4y ago
innovate what? what pro needs in camera processing? when you can process on a computer that is way more powerful and better UX for processing a large number of images?
- criddell 4y ago
  The consumer market is a pretty big part of most DSLR sales. There really aren’t all that many professional photographers, relatively speaking.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]